1 hour ago, Anthony Thorne said:

There are a number of things that will be discussed in a couple of weeks. 

One item [I wonder] is ....why another book?

10 minutes ago, Pete Mellor said:

  The records were scheduled to be made public Tuesday, but the White House announced late Friday night that it would delay their publication until at least Dec. 15 — and perhaps longer if President Joe Biden determines it’s in the nation’s best interest to keep them confidential.

 

Just saw a CBS report that stated-- the administration needed more time to review the information involved

On 10/18/2021 at 7:41 PM, Karl Hilliard said:

   

       Rather than go off on a tangent of absolutes [absolutely was a Harvey...absolutely was no such person] I would like to stick with the topic at hand. On a search [this forum] --there are pages of Oswald in Mexico discussions and I viewed just one that states as do others...that  "Silvia Duran's name and telephone number appears in Oswald's notebook". Superficially, that is only sort of true.  Ms Duran's name was located in the notebook. However, the phone number was written along with the Cuban consulate address and Silvia's name was written below that... as an apparent afternote. The FBI was known to have fiddled with that address book. They [Hoover?] didn't like it that SA Jim Hosty's name also appears in it. I will provide a link which shows that light on the matter. A C-Span article on the top of the page----

https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=301625911020337

 

 

I tried to bring the topic back on track with the above. I request some advanced comment concerning the appearance of Duran's name in the Oswald address book.

Based on some earwitnesses describing the final shot as a pa-pow sound and the corresponding Zapruder frames showing a split second snapping forward of his head and then violently back and to the left...I would say it is possible that JFK was shot twice instantly in the head.

Or why don't we just ask Fred Litwin?

OK here is a New Orleans Sharon [doesn't say where she was born]

Quote

Ms. Litwin was president of NolaVie, an online cultural news magazine she co-founded in 2011

[no picture]....  https://www.legacy.com/us/obituaries/nytimes/name/sharon-litwin-obituary?pid=180762699

On 10/16/2021 at 11:06 PM, Anthony Thorne said:

... you wouldn't really be going out on a limb by wondering if Fred and Sharon Litwin were related.

 

 

https://www.legacy.com/us/obituaries/sfgate/name/sharon-litwin-obituary?pid=180373920

Fred Litwin is not mentioned.

       Rather than go off on a tangent of absolutes [absolutely was a Harvey...absolutely was no such person] I would like to stick with the topic at hand. On a search [this forum] --there are pages of Oswald in Mexico discussions and I viewed just one that states as do others...that  "Silvia Duran's name and telephone number appears in Oswald's notebook". Superficially, that is only sort of true.  Ms Duran's name was located in the notebook. However, the phone number was written along with the Cuban consulate address and Silvia's name was written below that... as an apparent afternote. The FBI was known to have fiddled with that address book. They [Hoover?] didn't like it that SA Jim Hosty's name also appears in it. I will provide a link which shows that light on the matter. A C-Span article on the top of the page----

https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=301625911020337

On 10/1/2021 at 3:46 PM, Richard Price said:

Or...perhaps he has shown no remorse because he truly has NO memory of the shooting, which by the way he has continually stated over the years - (without exception, I believe).

The exception being before the conviction---

Quote

 

Despite the fact that Sirhan admitted his guilt in a recorded confession while in police custody on June 9, a lengthy, publicized trial followed in The People of the State of California v. Sirhan Sirhan. The judge did not accept his confession and denied his request to withdraw his plea of "not guilty" in order to plead "guilty".^[22]

On February 10, 1969, Sirhan's lawyers made a motion in chambers to enter a plea of guilty to first-degree murder in exchange for life imprisonment rather than the death penalty. Sirhan told Judge Herbert V. Walker that he wanted to withdraw his original plea of not guilty in order to plead guilty as charged on all counts. He also asked that his counsel "dissociate themselves from this case completely." The judge asked him what he wanted to do about sentencing, and Sirhan replied, "I will ask to be executed."^[22] Walker denied the motion and said, "This court will not accept the plea." He also denied Sirhan's request for his counsel to withdraw; his counsel entered another motion to withdraw from the case of their own volition, but Walker denied that as well.^[22] Walker subsequently ordered that the record be sealed pertaining to the motion.^[23]

 

In all history...who has ever pleaded guilty and asked for execution to a crime he can't remember?

Quote

 

Sirhan's defense counsel included attorney Grant Cooper, who had hoped to demonstrate that the killing had been the impulsive act of a man with a mental deficiency. But Walker admitted into evidence pages from three of the journal notebooks Sirhan had kept that suggested the crime was premeditated and "quite calculating and willful."^[22] On March 3, Cooper asked Sirhan in direct testimony if he had shot Kennedy; Sirhan replied, "Yes, sir," but then said that he did not bear Kennedy any ill will.^[22] Sirhan also testified that he had killed Kennedy "with 20 years of malice aforethought." ~~

~~ Sirhan repeated his claim to have no memory of the shooting, saying: "It's all vague now. I'm sure you all have it in your records. I can't deny it or confirm it. I just wish this whole thing had never taken place." His parole was denied on the grounds that he had not expressed adequate remorse for his crime or acknowledged its severity.^[53]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sirhan_Sirhan

 

His own attorney confirms Sirhan's admission... "It's all vague NOW" and wishing- "the whole thing had never taken place" also tells me that he really does remember and has no genuine remorse. 

Quote

 

How a former Trump aide is pressing Biden to loosen national security secrets

Upon taking office, President Joe Biden and his Cabinet cleared out scores of government advisory panels containing Trump administration appointees.

But an obscure presidential advisory board still led by one of former President Donald Trump’s more controversial aides is pressing Biden to dramatically reduce government secrecy on everything from military space programs to historical records related to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.

The bipartisan Public Interest Declassification Board, whose members serve three-year terms, is now chaired by Ezra Cohen, who worked for disgraced Trump national security adviser Michael Flynn and held several top national security posts (and has also been dogged by one of the leading conspiracy theories trafficked by Trump supporters).

But so far Cohen, who Trump appointed to run the board in January, is getting plaudits from longtime advocates for government openness and from fellow board members who share his goals....

 

The JFK Records Act: Will There Be a Final Chapter?

If it hasn't been mentioned.....

• I did not see this posted yet
• 🙇‍♂️
•  

Quote

As of September 2019, Hinckley's attorney said he plans to ask for full, unconditional release by the end of the year from the court orders that determine where he can live. On September 27, 2021 a federal judge approved Hinckley for unconditional release beginning June 2022.

https://www.npr.org/2021/09/27/1040872498/john-hinckley-unconditional-release

On 9/26/2021 at 9:07 PM, Chris Barnard said:

Q.
Is it fair to assume that Lee Harvey Oswald was not supposed to be apprehended alive? 

 

 

Absolutely. I have always believed that Oswald was supposed to get gunned down at the Texas Theater but the Dallas police blew their assignment. Consider how many cops showed up at the TT shotguns in hand. The presumption was that they were after a desperate gunman that had just shot [critically/mortally] one of their own. A Dallas police officer [as far as I could determine] had not been so assaulted since before the Bonnie and Clyde days. I could find no such records on line anyway. Also, what about reports that agents from the FBI and the Secret Service were also present at the arrest? What were they doing there?

So why didn't they gun down Oswald right then and there? Maybe McDonald screwed it up. Oswald did it supporters have claimed that the police did not wish to endanger innocent patrons [there was no one at all around Oswald] I have the original Dallas papers.... McDonald was interviewed saying that "he had his gun drawn and was ready for trouble". Mention of that is completely missing from his testimony. As a matter of course...McDonald stated that he "grabbed his suspect around the waist"--- like, Shall we dance?😆

1 hour ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

Working here.

Re-boot time....works now🙂

Does anyone else have trouble loading the Kennedys and King site?

https://www.kennedysandking.com/

On 9/18/2021 at 7:33 AM, Gil Jesus said:

TED CALLAWAY AND SAM GUINYARD

After hearing gunshots, he confronted an armed man who approached him while himself being unarmed, a man who he testified came within 20 feet of him.

 

  Callaway testified that the gunman got within 20 feet of him, Guinyard testified the gunman was 10 feet away.

How could anyone that close to the gun mistake an automatic for a revolver when they look nothing alike ?

 

Quote

 

Mr. BALL. Tell us what happened.
Mr. CALLAWAY. We first went into the room. There was Jim Leavelle, the detective, Sam Guinyard, and then this busdriver and myself. We waited down there for probably 20 or 30 minutes. And Jim told us, "When I show you these guys, be sure,. take your time, see if you can make a positive identification."
Mr. BALL. Had you known him before?
Mr. CALLAWAY. No. And he said, "We want to be sure, we want to try to wrap him up real tight on killing this officer. We think he is the same one that shot the President. But if we can wrap him up tight on killing this officer, we have got him." So they brought four men in.
I stepped to the back of the room, so I could kind of see him from the same distance which I had seen him before. And when he came out, I knew him.
Mr. BALL. You mean he looked like the same man?
Mr. CALLAWAY. Yes.
Mr. BALL. About what distance was he away from you--the closest that he ever was to you?
Mr. CALLAWAY. About 56 feet.
Mr. BALL. You measured that, did you?
Mr. CALLAWAY. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. Last Saturday morning?
Mr. CALLAWAY. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. Measured it with a tape measure?
Mr. CALLAWAY. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. Did he have the same clothes on in the lineup--did the man have the same clothes?
Mr. CALLAWAY. He had the same trousers and shirt, but he didn't have his jacket on. He had ditched his jacket.   

 

I couldn't find where Callaway stated that he was as close as 20 feet to the suspect...just 56 feet which made me quite skeptical. [I have a neighbor who looks like her sister--at 60 feet away I can't tell which one sometimes and I have 20/20 vision] I also couldn't find where Callaway described the weapon as an automatic. Noticed that the policeman told him that they could "wrap up" the shooting of the president as well.. with his identification of the suspected shooter.

That could have just given Callaway the idea that he could make a place for himself in history as the witness who nailed the assassin.

Callaway stated that the suspect had "ditched his jacket". How could he have known this? The police could have very well removed it upon/after arrest.

 I surmise that after five months--the witnesses were summarily rehearsed.
 

Quote

 

 
Mr. BALL. What did you see him doing?
Mr. GUINYARD. He came through there running and knocking empty shells out of his pistol and he had it up just like this with his hand.
Mr. BALL. With which hand?
Mr. GUINYARD. With his right hand; just kicking them out.
Mr. BALL. He had it up?
Mr. GUINYARD. Yes; he had it up just like this.
Mr. BALL. How was he kicking them out?
Mr. GUINYARD. He was rolling them with his hand--with his thumb.
Mr. BALL. Rolling them with his thumb?
Mr. GUINYARD. Checking them--he had the pistol up just like this [indicating].
Mr. BALL. Did he use his left hand any?
Mr. GUINYARD. No; I never did see him use his left hand.
Mr. BALL. He didn't?
Mr. GUINYARD. No, sir.

Mr. BALL. Now, he had a light gray jacket on?
Mr. GUINYARD. And a brown shirt on.
Mr. BALL. And a white T-shirt on?
Mr. GUINYARD. Underneath it, because this brown shirt was open at the throat

Mr. BALL. How close .was he to you when you saw him?
Mr. GUINYARD. I guess he was about 10 feet from me---maybe.
Mr. BALL. About 10 feet?
Mr. GUINYARD. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. Mr. Callaway has told us and we measured it with a tape measure, that Oswald was on the west side of the street, and we measured it and he figured it was about 55 feet from him when he passed.
Mr. GUINYARD. Well, he crossed over after he crossed the driveway.
Mr. BALL. Well----
Mr. GUINYARD. Mr. Callaway followed him, you see, we was together--he was my boss at that time and he followed him.
Mr. BALL. Callaway?
Mr. GUINYARD. Yes; trying to see which way was he going.

Mr. BALL. Were they all about the same color?
Mr. GUINYARD. No, sir; they wasn't all about the same color.
Mr. BALL. All about the same color?
Mr. GUINYARD. No, sir; they wasn't all about the same color.

Guinyard describes a pistol with which the alleged perp was "kicking"? out the shells. "Rolling them out with his thumb"....That is just nonsense. For one thing-- [if it was a S&W ..any caliber.. and most any other revolvers]--you have an ejector in front of the barrel to remove shells. You can't hardly remove them one at a time. Why would someone even try to do that? You push the ejector..they all come out and you reload. Other witnesses stated this unloading one shell at a time and flinging them up in the air. How can you not use your left hand to perform any such action? He contradicts his boss stating that the suspect was 10 feet [maybe] away from him. That is almost close enough to shake hands huh? Guinyard apparently saw this brown shirt that Callaway didn't. Callaway's business only had two workers? Himself and a porter. Also...Guinyard said "we was together" and his boss followed the perp. Then what did Guinyard do? Wasn't asked. Questioned about the line up---"They wasn't all about the same color". I have trouble translating that. One guy was blue?..one was green? Oh well--with only a sixth grade education--perhaps he couldn't remember his lines.

12 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

 

I have a theory that no JFKA theory can proven, but I cannot prove my theory. 

 

 

The government theory that Oswald did it and did it all alone is a cover-up and that is no theory.

Fortunately...the witness testimony page has been restored. This has been very useful to everyone. If it hasn't been posted yet---------   https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/wit.htm

9 hours ago, Steve Thomas said:

I've had 3 thoughts:

1) Was Lee Oswald ever seen in that theater before? I've never seen anyone say that. If he'd never been there before, what are the implications of that?

2) The scuffle in the theater was brought about by Nick McDonald. Read his WC testimony carefully.

3) Oswald's whole demeanor changed Saturday afternoon following a 12:30 PM interrogation that the Dallas Police did their best (but failed) to hide.

Steve Thomas

1)

Quote

Mr. BALL. Let me see. Had you ever seen this man before then at that particular theatre?
Mrs. POSTAL. Not that I know of, huh-uh.

Postal probably only ever just looked at the money that someone gave her for a ticket and made change if she had to.

2)

Quote

Mr. BALL - What did you do?
Mr. McDONALD - Well, when I got to the front of the theater there was several police cars already at the scene, and I surmised that officers were already inside the theater.
So I decided to go to the rear, in the alley, and seal off the rear. I parked my squad car. I noticed there were three or four other officers standing outside with shotguns guarding the rear exits. There were three other officers at the rear door. I joined them. We walked into the rear exit door over the alley.
Mr. BALL - What were their names?
Mr. McDONALD - Officer Hawkins, T. A. Hutson, and C. T. Walker. And as we got inside the door, we were met by a man that was in civilian clothes, a suit, and he told us that the man that acted suspiciously as he ran into the theater was sitting downstairs in the orchestra seats, and not in the balcony. He was sitting at the rear of the theater alone.
Officer Walker and I went to the exit curtains that is to the left of the movie screen. I looked into the audience. I saw the person that the shoe store salesman had pointed out to us.
Mr. BALL - Were the lights on or off?
Mr. McDONALD - The lights were up, and the movie was playing at this time.

"Several police cars were already at the scene". McDonald chose to [drive?] around to the rear. A guy in a suit met them. and told them that the suspect was sitting downstairs and not in the balcony. I wonder who this suit was [Johnny Brewer?] Brewer did not see Oswald outside of the shoe store like he lied said. Radio reports of the Tippit shooting were not broadcast until after Oswald had been arrested.  

Quote

Mr. McDONALD -  but I kept my eye on him and any other persons. 
And just as I got to the row where the suspect was sitting, I stopped abruptly, and turned in and told him to get on his feet. He rose immediately, bringing up both hands. He got this hand about shoulder high, his left hand shoulder high, and he got his right hand about breast high. He said, "Well, it is all over now."
As he said this, I put my left hand on his waist and then his hand went to the waist. And this hand struck me between the eyes on the bridge of the nose.

Supposedly, this suspect was involved in the shooting of a Dallas policeman [which didn't happen here even before Bonnie and Clyde] Unafraid it would seem... McDonald grabbed Lee around the waist? [Shall we dance] In the papers' story back then, McDonald said that he had his gun drawn ["If there was trouble I was ready for it " he said]

That statement would not be made in testimony or else what happened to that gun during/after the 'fight'? Needless to say, a similar suspect today would be blasted before he could think about it. Like a fish net, the whole story simply didn't hold water.

3) Unfortunately Neither the DPD, the FBI, The Secret Service or anyone else had bothered to locate a tape recorder or a stenographer for that interrogation [or didn't really want to]

"James Douglass in JFK and The Unspeakable presented a pretty compelling case for such.  Butch Burroughs, the concession stand operator, and person left in charge of operations at the time...."

  I absolutely agree that there are some compelling statements. As I stated...there was no sworn testimony to hold up as evidence. However I would be willing to demonstrate to anyone that the testimony I mentioned  is plastered with lies.

On 9/19/2021 at 8:52 PM, Ron Bulman said:

 one led the police there.  

A false Oswald was not directly proven with any sworn testimony so that one is far past verification.

I do wonder how "Lee' would have "led police" to the TT. Julia Postal and Johnny Brewer [neither one who saw Lee sneaking in] lied...both on their depositions [affidavits] and in testimony. The only way that the DPD, the FBI and who all knows who else could have converged on the theater that soon, would have to have known beforehand that their quarry was already there.

Did the same person who penned the convoluted ramblings of the Oswald Diary also actually write this letter?---https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=7986&search=%252525252525252522Harvey_Lee%252525252525252BOswald%252525252525252522#relPageId=120&search="Harvey_Lee+Oswald"

Or this one?--- https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=7986&search=%252525252525252525252522Harvey_Lee%252525252525252525252BOswald%252525252525252525252522#relPageId=121&search="Harvey_Lee+Oswald"

Or this well composed.. almost business quality correspondence?--- https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=7986&search=%2525252525252525252525252525252525252522Harvey_Lee%2525252525252525252525252525252525252BOswald%2525252525252525252525252525252525252522#relPageId=123&search="Harvey_Lee+Oswald" 

There was a letter from John McVickar [who was in the State Dept Moscow field office late '50s] He wrote that "it seemed [to him] a possibility that Oswald was following a pattern of behavior in which he had been tutored by person or persons unknown"

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=7986&search=%2525252525252522Harvey_Lee%2525252525252BOswald%2525252525252522#relPageId=115

Quote

Jan.5. I go to Red Cross in Moscow for money with Interpreter........ Jan.7. June-July Summer months of green beauty; pine forest very deep.....Jan 8. I meet the city mayor, comrade Shrapof, who welcomes me to Minsk....  Feb. 28th I receive letter from Embassy.... March 16. I receive a small flat......Nov. Finds the approach of winter....

Firstly...Who writes like that?-- "Finds the approach of winter".   Summer months of green beauty; pine forest very deep---   Really?      Next, Upon reading that Epstein text---"comrade" Shrapof was not even mayor of Minsk in 1959 [it was a couple of years later] Even if he was, why would he wish to 'welcome' defector Oswald to Minsk? Many if not all passages of the diary [I believe] were not originally written by an American. I think it was written in Russian and then transposed. Americans would write 'apartment' they wouldn't say 'flat'' [a European word]

In the Cyrillic [Russian, Ukrainian and Belarusian at least] there are no articles [a, an, the] and yet in the diary--sometimes they are there and sometimes [awkwardly] not.

I still believe that the diary was composed as some kind of a spy device that only spies could decipher.

On Saturday, June 27, 1964, the Dallas Morning News ran a front-page article written by/accredited to Hugh Aynesworth under the heading caption, “Secret Diary – Oswald’s Thoughts Bared.” This was supplemented with a full page copyrighted article captioned, “The Lee Harvey Oswald Diary – October 16, 1959: I Want Russian Citizenship.” The article thereafter received (understandably) wide dissemination, not to mention notoriety, including synopsised versions in the various Washington, D. C. newspapers on the following day, Sunday, June 28th. The FBI’s original memorandum constructed in conjunction with the publication of the article, a memo written on June 28, 1964, by Walter Sullivan and addressed to Alan Belmont, stated that “the original diary was delivered by the Dallas Police to the Bureau and a photographic reproduction of it appeared as Exhibit 36 in the Bureau’s initial report on the investigation of the assassination of President Kennedy.” The Sullivan memorandum went on to further state that “Aynesworth’s article carefully follows the diary and quotes voluminously from it. It is obvious he has a copy of the diary and that this is the basis for his article.” On this same date, June 28, ASIC of the Dallas FO was telephonically contacted by Bureau HQ at which time he advised Washington that he and the DFO “did not know the source of the information for Aynesworth.” However, it was further reported that “Aynesworth is a police reporter for the Dallas Morning News and has been anti-Bureau throughout the whole investigation.”(FBI: Record No: 124-10369-10009; Record Series HQ: Agency File No. 62-117290-Admin. Folder – V8; specifically: Record No. 124-10030-10464: Record Series HQ: FBI Case File No.: 105-82555-4377)

In this same memorandum Kyle Clark revealed to Bureau HQ that on repeated occasions Dallas Assistant DA, William Alexander, had “contacted the Dallas office and wanted photographic copies of all the property obtained by the police department and turned over to the FBI.” Alexander’s rationale for these requests was in order to aide DA Henry Wade in his testimony before the Commission. The requests were rebuffed by the Dallas FO and Alexander had been referred to the Dallas Police Department “as they had been given photographs of all of the property.” Because of the information Aynesworth had included in his article, and other items mentioned by Aynesworth, “ASAC Clark and SAC Shanklin are of the opinion that Alexander is probably the source of the (Aynesworth) leak.” At the time of the article, only the Warren Commission, the Dallas Police Department, and the FBI had copies of the Oswald diary. The Bureau “know we did not furnish the material to Aynesworth,” ruled out the Commission as the source of the leak, and concluded by “suspecting that Alexander or someone in the Dallas Police Department” as the source of the Aynesworth leak. The original memorandum constructed concluded further action “without making any direct inquiry,” instead alerting the Dallas office to “try and learn the source of the leak and advise the Bureau.”

The following day, June 29, 1964, Kyle Clark had a meeting with Capt. Will Fritz of the DPD at which time Fritz indicated that he had been unable, “to date,” to determine if the diary had been furnished to the Dallas Morning News “by anyone on the Dallas Police Force.” In response to this reply, Clark asked for, and obtained permission, to indicate to Fritz that the DFO felt that “it was William Alexander, the County Attorney, who sought the material in question” in the first place and thus was potentially under suspicion. Fritz’s reaction to this news was not recorded by Clark in his covering memorandum of the interview. On the same date, June 29, 1964, James Malley, FBI liaison with the Commission, discussed the article with J. Lee Rankin, advising Rankin “that reporter Aynesworth of the Dallas Morning News was not friendly and that while the Bureau would handle the Commission’s request if desired, it appeared a better approach would be for the Commission to directly contact the newspaper and request information from the newspaper as to the source of the article.” Rankin indicated to Malley that the matter would be discussed at an afternoon session with members of the Commission and the Bureau would be informed of future action.

On July 1, 1964, the Bureau received a letter “from J. Lee Rankin of the President’s Commission dated June 30, 1964, requesting a thorough investigation concerning the publication of the Lee Harvey Oswald diary by the Dallas Morning News. The letter contained the actual resolution passed by the President’s Commission,” and based upon this resolution, “ASAC Kyle Clark of the Dallas Office…was instructed to conduct immediate investigation in order that the results could be furnished to the President’s Commission at the earliest possible time.” Hoover made sure that this became “news” and an article captioned “FBI Requested to Investigate Leak of Portions of Oswald’s Diary” was published in both the Washington Post and the Washington Times Herald on June 30, 1964.

The eventual “investigation” lasted for almost eight weeks with the FBI questioning individuals from the Dallas Morning News, CBS News, Time-LIFE, the DPD and the DA’s office, though the main content of the matter was resolved, to the satisfaction of the Bureau and the Commission, by the first week of August, 1964. There were numerous investigative speed bumps along the way, with perhaps the largest one being an incident that arose on July 8, 1964. On that date Detective H. M Hart, Criminal Intelligence Section, DPD, relayed a letter to Captain W. P. Gannaway, Special Service Bureau, DPD, the “SUBJECT” matter of which is listed as: “Diary of Lee H. Oswald.” According to Hart, “confidential informant T-1” stated to Hart “that Representative Ford (fnu), a member of the Warren Commission, sold SUBJECT (i.e. Oswald diary) to the Dallas Morning News. Mr. Ford had a copy of the diary and took it to executives of LIFE magazine and also Newsweek magazine. Source states that these executives paid Marina Oswald, widow of Lee Harvey Oswald, $16,000.00 for the world copyright of the diary. Source further states that proof of this is in the hand of the Dallas County District Attorney’s office.” In an “Evaluation” statement added to the bottom of his letter, Detective Hart further indicated: “Informant considered reliable; possibly true.”(A copy of this correspondence can be found at two different locations within the Dallas City Archives holdings of the Dallas Police Department: Box 13, Folder 4, File # 51; and Box 18, Folder 4, File # 12)

Two days after the Hart letter, July 10, 1964, LIFE magazine published an article that included, once again, information from Oswald’s diary. On this same date, J. Lee Rankin sent Hoover a second letter in which “the President’s Commission requested the Bureau to conduct appropriate investigation concerning circumstances surrounding the obtaining and publication of Oswald’s diary in the July 10, 1964 issue of “Life” magazine.” J. Lee Rankin had been informed of the alleged Gerald Ford leak/sale of the diary, precise date unspecified, though surviving documentation would appear to indicate that this revelation took place no later than July 10, 1964. The confidential Hart “source”, informant T-1, was revealed in a Rosen to Belmont memorandum dated July 13, 1964, to wit: “Assistant District Attorney William Alexander, Dallas County, has intimated that Representative Ford was the source of the leak of Oswald’s diary to the news media.”(FBI: Record Number: 124-10054-10322: Record Series: HQ: Agency File Number: 105-82555-4401)

The day after the Rankin-to-Hoover letter, Supervisor Ludwig Oberndorf of the Washington Field Office “advised that the interview with Representative Gerald R. Ford, a member of the President’s Commission, had been approved…Representative Ford has requested that he be interviewed in order that he could go on record concerning this matter.” This particular communiqué had been “submitted for record purposes” only, by Rosen, though there appears little doubt that Rankin was informed of the identity of informant T-1. By the following day, July 14, 1964, the Bureau were identifying the

”two matters” of the Dallas Morning News article of June 28 and the LIFE magazine article of July 10 as being “directly related” and over the next three weeks numerous individuals were interviewed by members of the FBI though everyone interviewed “either denied or have refused to identify the source of the diary.” The investigation eventually involved members of the Washington, New York, Houston and Dallas Field Offices with a “breakthrough” occurring on July 22, 1964. On that date the Dallas FO furnished the Bureau Lab “one roll of 35 mm positive film containing photographs of the diary, as well as one roll of 35 mm negative film of this positive and Xerox prints of the pertinent pages of the Oswald diary. These 35 mm films and prints were obtained from the District Attorney’s Office in Dallas, Texas. In addition, the New York Office has furnished the original Xerox prints of the 12 pages of the Oswald diary that “Life” magazine obtained and published in their July 10, 1964 issue.”(FBI: Record Number: 124-10048-10258: Record Series: HQ: Agency File Number: 105-82555-4509) As a result of comparative analysis of this material, “Laboratory examination of these items has established that the 35 mm rolls of film obtained from the Dallas District Attorney’s Office contain imperfections in their original state that are reproduced in the Xerox copies used by “Life” magazine. This shows that the “Life” magazine copies originated from the 35 mm rolls of film from the Dallas District Attorney’s Office.” Further legwork established that the Dallas DA’s office acquired their copies of the Oswald diary material, and other evidence, from the Dallas Police Department, their film “taken to the Recordak Corporation in Dallas where a 35 mm positive, 35 mm negative and 3 sets of hard copies were made for the District Attorney’s office. The “Life” magazine prints are these same ‘hard copies’ or are ‘hard copies’ subsequently made from the District Attorney’s 35 mm film.” Though the correspondence on this issue is theoretically from W. D. Griffith and addressed to Bureau Lab Chief, Ivan W. Conrad, the stenographic notations present on the documentation clearly indicate that the comparative analysis and resulting conclusions were the work of “LLS,” Lyndal L. Shaneyfelt. On the same date as the lengthy “Shaneyfelt” memorandum on this matter, July 22, 1964, the information and results of the FBI Lab analysis were supplied to the President’s Commission by way of a letter sent to J. Lee Rankin. A memorandum attached to the letter that was to be sent to the Commission (Rankin) indicated the following, by way of updated “background” information: “Extensive investigation has been conducted by our Dallas, New York, and Houston Offices in this matter. Regarding the publication of Oswald’s diary in “Life” magazine, we have now determined arrangements for the publication were handled through Paula Aynesworth, who is the wife of Hugh Aynesworth, reporter for the Dallas Morning News and who published Oswald’s diary on June 27 and 28, 1964. Paula Aynesworth received $2500 for this information from “Life” magazine.”(Ibid prior footnote in this section, as well as: FBI: Record Number: 124-10034-10316: Record Series: HQ: Agency File Number: 62-109060-1st numbered document after serial 3524)

The FBI identification of Paula Aynesworth as a paid source of information on the Oswald diary is accurate and confirmation of this is found within the surviving papers of Holland McCombs, Corbitt Special Collections, University Archives, University of Tennessee at Martin. On June 27, 1964, Holland McCombs sent Natalie Kosek, Life Picture Bureau, Head Office, New York, a “Rush” memorandum and package. Addressed to Will Lang, Life Magazine, Time and Life Building, Rockefeller Center, New York, McComb’s indicated the impending arrival of a copy of “Oswald Russian Diary,” a package air expressed via American Airlines, Flight # 92, due to arrive at Kennedy Airport at 9:43 pm on the evening of June 27, 1964, Waybill # 886657. In the package were “photostatic” copies of 12 pages from the diary, but there were attached McCombs constructed stipulations to be followed prior to publication in LIFE magazine: “In page 6 should cross out three or four lines that describe Zeger. Page 7…where ‘Zeger advises me to go back to the U.S.A., etc…page 9. ‘I confided in Zeger, ‘etc… Our thoughts are that Mr. Zeger would be seriously hurt by the Communists if this were run verbatim. In the writings of Hugh Aynesworth he has changed the name to Andrei Tovli when it was something risky and left Zeger in it as a place where Oswald partied occasionally…even mentioned the part about the daughters etc.” (Holland McCombs Collection, Corbitt Special Collections, University Archives, University of Tennessee at Martin. Box 153, Folder F-9)

In addition to the Oswald diary package, McCombs included a copy of a signed agreement between LIFE magazine and Paula Eby Aynesworth, a document dated June 27, 1964. The terms of this agreement stipulated that Paula Aynesworth was to receive the sum of $2500.00 “in cash or via Western Union money order addressed to 729 North Buckner Blvd., Dallas 18, Texas, by Tuesday, the thirtieth of June, 1964.” There were other clauses in this document, including the “understanding” that Paula Aynesworth would not be held responsible in the event that “copies of above document are released by other parties than Paula Eby Aynesworth.” In his letter of accompaniment McCombs boasts of him and LIFE having a “fast leg up” on the Oswald diary material with the added comment that “here’s hoping it will be worth the $2,500.” McCombs even went so far as to suggest that Time-Life send him a “rush check…first thing Monday morning…” so that he could cash same “and hand over the cash to Mrs. Aynesworth…” McCombs also enclosed a verbatim copy of “Aynesworth’s story of diary in Dallas Morning News.”

On July 27, 1964, five days after he received original communication on the Lab examination of the 35 mm film and hard copies, J. Lee Rankin received a second letter from Hoover, a document that once again was ghost-written by Lyndal L. Shaneyfelt. In the concluding paragraph, the following was indicated: “The Xerox copies of the diary obtained from the District Attorney’s Office and the Xerox copies obtained from “Life” magazine were all examined for latent fingerprints. Seventeen latent fingerprints and three latent palm prints were developed on the copies from “Life” magazine. Five latent fingerprints and four latent palm prints were developed on the copies from the District Attorney’s Office. One of the latent fingerprints on the copies from the District Attorney’s Office is identical with the left thumb print of a William Franklin Alexander, who may be identical with William F. Alexander, Assistant District Attorney, Dallas, Texas. The other fingerprints and palm prints have not been identified.”(FBI: Record Number: 124-10044-10266: Record Series: HQ: Agency File Number: 62-109060-3567.) This Hoover-to-Rankin letter was two pages in length, but there was a third page “Note For Dallas” attached to the letter, a note not sent to Rankin: “The Dallas Office should obtain, if possible, the fingerprints and palm prints of William F. Alexander and W. H. Davis, Jr., of the District Attorney’s Office. They should also obtain, if possible, fingerprints and palm prints of Hugh Aynesworth and Paula Aynesworth for comparison with the unidentified latent fingerprints and palm prints…”

On July 29, 1964, an interesting “Airtel” was sent to SAC, Dallas, from the Director. This three page document contained a number of suggestions for clarification for the individual responsible for generating reports on the Oswald diary information “leak,” SA Robert P. Gemberling of the Dallas FO. The very first “clarification” was a note that Gemberling’s report of his “interview with Holland McCombs, Dallas Correspondent for “Life” magazine, should not be included in the next Oswald report.” The airtel contained numerous follow-up suggestions for Gemberling, as well as omissions to be clarified, and concluded with this statement: “Investigation indicates W. F. Alexander, Assistant District Attorney, Dallas County, Texas, is a strong suspect and our laboratory has determined that copies of Oswald’s dairy in possession of “Life” magazine originated from the film that was in possession of the Dallas District Attorney’s office furnished by District Attorney Henry Wade.” Five days later, August 3, 1964, aspects of the investigation were halted in Dallas. In an Airtel sent to SAC Dallas, Shanklin was “advised against” fingerprinting the individuals described in the prior Airtel of July 27, 1964 because “newspaper officials were touchy about this matter and instructed their employees to clear any interviews concerning the diary with managing editor. We have proven ‘Life’ magazine’s copies of diary came from Dallas DA’s office and any effort to obtain prints from principals involved could result in unwarranted publicity or possible embarrassment. It is recommended no prints be sought from these people unless Commission specifically requests.”(FBI: Record Number: 124-10044-10266: Record Series: HQ: 105-82555-4559) As far as I have been able to ascertain, the Warren Commission pressed this issue no further. In a two page letter that accompanied the Hoover-to-Dallas Airtel of August 3, 1964, time was taken to once again lash out at the DA’s office, this script though assigned to Hoover actually the prose of “RDR” – Richard D. Rogge: “Since the initiation of this investigation District Attorney Wade has been a thorn in the side of the Bureau by his impulsive manner of making inaccurate press releases resulting in confusion. Wade’s Office has been negligent in the handling of evidence and he has shown a lackadaisical attitude in this regard. Further, in his testimony before the President’s Commission Wade raised several points which apparently were construed by the Commission to substantiate uninformed charges that Oswald could have been an informant of this Bureau. This necessitated an unusual amount of work on our part to refute.”

The investigation dwindled onward, Marina Oswald denying on August 8, 1964, that though she had been contacted repeatedly by Hugh Aynesworth and had been interviewed by him “she told Aynesworth she did not care to discuss the diary.” Gerald Ford was interviewed by Cartha “Deke” DeLoach on August 17, 1964, at which time “he desired to unequivocally state, and to furnish a signed statement if necessary, that he did not leak the information in question.” This information was presented to the Commission, by way of a wrap-up letter dated August 26, 1964, from Hoover to Rankin, a communiqué that ended: “No further action is being taken by this Bureau concerning the leak of Oswald’s diary to the Dallas Morning News and Life magazine in the absence of a specific request from you.” None, it would appear, ever came thereafter from Rankin.

In the end it would appear that the “leak” of the Oswald diary to the media came about as a result of acquisition of materials from the District Attorney’s Office by the Aynesworth’s. Thereafter Mrs. Aynesworth at least got something out of it - $2500.00 – while the Bureau and the Commission investigated, to a dull conclusion, the entire affair. On July 13, 1964, William Alexander was interviewed by the FBI, vehemently denying any knowledge of the entire matter. It was further reported that Alexander stated, “President Johnson, John Edgar Hoover, the FBI and the Warren Commission ‘could kiss my a—‘…” On the same date, “Mr. William A McKenzie, attorney for Marina Oswald, on 7-6-64 said he sold publication rights of the diary to Life Magazine on 7-1-64. A Mr. Schad of Life Magazine obtained the diary from Hugh Aynesworth of the Dallas Morning News. It is noted Aynesworth appears to be deeply involved in this matter and when interviewed, has refused to reveal the source of his information and was uncooperative.”(FBI: Record Number: 124-10172-10043: Record Series: HQ: Agency File Number: 105-82555-4522)
In addition to the document references indicated in this posting, one can also find relevant materials in: FBI: Record Number: 124-10369-10009: Record Series: HQ: Agency File Number: 62-117290-Administration Folder-V8; and: FBI: Record Number: 124-10371-10183: Record Series: HQ: Agency File Number: 62-117290-Administration Folder – E11:

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

"Aynesworth was anti FBI"?- My eye.- Hugh Aynesworth was a point man for the FBI [and though retired, still is really] But no-one has ever revealed where that Oswald diary came from...not ever. Another fact about Hugh Aynesworth----- Was supposedly present in Dealey Plaza when the shots were fired then supposedly went on site for the Tippit slayer search...then hoofed it all the way to the Texas Theater in time for the police grab there...interviewed the rooming house lady that afternoon...and was in the police basement when Ruby blasted Oswald but for some benign reason was never called as a witness in any subsequent investigation ..Warren..HSCA or otherwise. Some baby-sitter that had watched Lee when he was 3 years old was called before the Commission. Henry Wade [who witnessed nothing] was called before the Commission but Mr Everywhere And Saw Everything That Weekend Hugh wasn't.